I think the answer is it can be done and probably quite well. I also
think it's informative that Nutch does not use Lucene for this
function, as I understand it, but that shouldn't stop you either. You
might also have a look at Apache Jackrabbit, which uses Lucene
underneath as a content repository.
-Grant
On Jul 29, 2008, at 5:34 AM, Ganesh - yahoo wrote:
Hello all,
I am also interested in this. I want to archive the content of the
document using Lucene.
Is it a good idea to use Lucene as storage engine?
Regards
Ganesh
----- Original Message ----- From: "Ian Lea" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <java-user@lucene.apache.org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 2:18 PM
Subject: Re: Using lucene as a database... good idea or bad idea?
John
I think it's a great idea, and do exactly this to store 5 million+
documents with info that it takes way too long to get out of our
Oracle database (think days). Not as many docs as you are talking
about, and less data for each doc, but I wouldn't have any concerns
about scaling. There are certainly lucene indexes out there bigger
than what you propose. You can compress the stored data to save some
space. Run times for optimization might get interesting but see
recent threads for suggestions on that. And since you are not too
concerned about performance you may not need to optimize much, or
even
at all.
Of course you need to remember that this is not a DBMS solution in
the
sense of transactions, recovery, etc. but I'm sure you are already
aware of that.
--
Ian.
On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 2:53 AM, John Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi All,
I have successfully used Lucene in the "tradtiional" way to provide
full-text search for various websites. Now I am tasked with
developing a
data-store to back a web crawler. The crawler can be configured
to retrieve
arbitrary fields from arbitrary pages, so the result is that each
document
may have a random assortment of fields. It seems like Lucene may
be a
natural fit for this scenario since you can obviously add
arbitrary fields
to each document and you can store the actually data in the
database. I've
done some research to make sure that it would meet all of our
individual
requirements (that we can iterate over documents, update (delete/
replace)
documents, etc.) and everything looks good. I've also seen a
couple of
references around the net to other people trying similar things...
however,
I know it's not meant to be used this way, so I thought I would
post here
and ask for guidance? Has anyone done something similar? Is
there any
specific reason to think this is a bad idea?
The one thing that I am least certain about his how well it will
scale. We
may reach the point where we have tens of millions of documents
and a high
percentage of those documents may be relatively large (10k-50k
each). We
actually would NOT be expecting/needing Lucene's normal extreme
fast text
search times for this, but we would need reasonable times for
adding new
documents to the index, retrieving documents by ID (for iterating
over all
documents), optimizing the index after a series of changes, etc.
Any advice/input/theories anyone can contribute would be greatly
appreciated.
Thanks,
-
John
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Send instant messages to your online friends http://in.messenger.yahoo.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------
Grant Ingersoll
http://www.lucidimagination.com
Lucene Helpful Hints:
http://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/BasicsOfPerformance
http://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/LuceneFAQ
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
